[copious.abundance]

This is an excerpt from a much longer - and quite interesting - article. The article is about uranium supplies but I found the black shale angle very interesting.

>>> LINK <<<

[...]

The Chattanooga shale in Tennessee contains a stratum, the Gassaway member, about 5 meters thick whose average content of uranium is about 70 grams per metric ton (Kerr, 1955). With a density of 2.5 metric tons per cubic meter, this would amount to about 175 grams of uranium per cubic meter, or to 875 grams per square meter for the total thickness of the member. Then for an area of a square mile the uranium content of this member would be 2.3 X 109 grams or 2300 metric tons. This does not sound impressive, and in fact, as compared with contents of the more familiar metallic ores, it is a trifling amount; nevertheless, the energy content of this member per square mile is equivalent to 30 billion barrels of oil, or to five East Texas oil fields. Uranium-rich black shales of Devonian-Mississippian age, which correlate with the Chattanooga, are widespread in the Mid-Continent area as well as in Tennessee and the neighboring states. In addition, the Sharon Springs member of the Pierre shale of Cretaceous age occurring in an extensive area of North and South Dakota east of the Black Hills is also rich in uranium. No attempt has been made to determine the amount of minable uranium which these shales must contain, but since their areal extent amounts to several hundred thousands of square miles, their uranium content would appear to be as much as several hundred million metric tons.

[...]

Abundance - what a concept!

[shortonsense]

This is an excerpt from a much longer - and quite interesting - article. The article is about uranium supplies but I found the black shale angle very interesting.

Hubbert did an assessment on the various shales and used them as a solution in the same paper where he invented the most recent peak oil era ( 3 Era's, Lesley was 1, Ickes was 2, Hubbert was 3 ). Its nice to know that even a half century ago, The King himself recognized abundance when he saw it!

[Tanada]

You might also take note that this type of Uranium deposit can be harvested by well, you drill a series of wells and pump a solvent solution through the formation, pump it back out at the other well and process the solvent to extract the metallic Uranium. This type of solvent extraction mining is cheaper and cleaner by an order of magnitude or more than conventional mining.

[shortonsense]

You might also take note that this type of Uranium deposit can be harvested by well, you drill a series of wells and pump a solvent solution through the formation, pump it back out at the other well and process the solvent to extract the metallic Uranium. This type of solvent extraction mining is cheaper and cleaner by an order of magnitude or more than conventional mining.

Excellent comment! So not only is there enough of this stuff to drown the world and US in energy, but we already know how to get it in a reasonable manner!

Now, if there wasn't so darn much oil and natural gas to get rid of first..... .( I'm serious...just because BAU is expected doesn't mean I have to be happy with such an outcome )

[sicophiliac]

Sure there is potential energy there but can it be extracted at a net energy return? I would reason that it wouldn't take nearly 30 billion barrels of oil to extract 1 square miles worth of shale and likely not even a tiny fraction of that but am I overlooking something ? While we are on the nuclear bandwagon by the way has anybody here ever done any reading on the potential of thorium instead of uranium for a nuclear fuel ? Especially in breeder reactors or liquid floride reactors?

[PrestonSturges]

I'm sure those folks can't wait for that uranium to show up in their well water.

[ColossalContrarian]

Sure there is potential energy there but can it be extracted at a net energy return? I would reason that it wouldn't take nearly 30 billion barrels of oil to extract 1 square miles worth of shale and likely not even a tiny fraction of that but am I overlooking something ? While we are on the nuclear bandwagon by the way has anybody here ever done any reading on the potential of thorium instead of uranium for a nuclear fuel ? Especially in breeder reactors or liquid floride reactors?

I think you're talking about EROEI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EROEI and in this case it seems like a double-whammy, Uranium + Shale Gas?

The Uranium mining alone would offset the EROEI price for gas enormously if Uranium prices stay where they are now.

[shortonsense]

Sure there is potential energy there but can it be extracted at a net energy return?

Dear God please don't drag out another tired EROEI claim, pretty please? It certainly didn't stop Hubbert from drawing the graph I referenced above, and that guy had already forgotten more about energy by that time in his life than the combined total of what every hobbyist in this forum THINKS they know.

However, in the interest of scale, lets paraphrase Hubbert.

The Gassaway member of the Chattanooga shale in Tennessee ( 15' thick ) has a uranium content of 2300 metric tons per square mile. The energy content is 30 billion barrels equivalent. Per square mile.

What do you think....we mine a 15 foot thick shale seam for an entire years supply of global crude oil energy equivalent? That shale, by the way, is listed on Hubberts figure as covering near half the state of Tennessee. Tennessee is 40,000+ miles square, lets be generous and say the Gassaway member only covers 1/3 of it ( feel free to check the area for yourself, Hubberts original 1956 work, Fig 28 ) which is 13,000 square miles, or 13,000 years of oil supply.

And all we have to do is dig up Tennessee the same way we are already doing to Alberta!!! Have you ever SEEN most of Tennessee? Heck, I'm all for it!

While we are on the nuclear bandwagon by the way has anybody here ever done any reading on the potential of thorium instead of uranium for a nuclear fuel ? Especially in breeder reactors or liquid floride reactors?

Hubbert has some thorium figures in his original work, but concentrates on mostly the uranium component of the shales. He did quantify a huge thorium deposit in North Carolina...again...probably enough to replace all oil energy for a couple more millenia, if not more.

This abundance thing is getting out of CONTROL!

[Homesteader]

So how is nuclear power production doing compared to the nuclear curve on Hubbert's graph?

[shortonsense]

I'm sure those folks can't wait for that uranium to show up in their well water.

189 years of shale gas production and that claim sure hasn't showed up much yet. Maybe if we wait another couple centuries?

[shortonsense]

So how is nuclear power production doing compared to the nuclear curve on Hubbert's graph?

Apparently not very good.

We found so much more oil and gas than Hubbert ever imagined that its delayed the entire ramp up in nuclear energy! Can you imagine? The King must be rolling over in his grave, realizing how much he UNDERESTIMATED everything!

[copious.abundance]

Just FYI, here is a map showing the approximate extent of the Chattanooga shale. Not too surpiringly, it goes right through Chattanooga.



There are also several companies starting to poke some holes into this shale for its gas potential. I stumbled across this article when I was looking for any recent info on the gas results there.

[shortonsense]

Just FYI, here is a map showing the approximate extent of the Chattanooga shale. Not too surpiringly, it goes right through Chattanooga.
There are also several companies starting to poke some holes into this shale for its gas potential. I stumbled across this article when I was looking for any recent info on the gas results there.

Goodness!! Hubberts blob was bigger. Your blob might only contain 10,000 years of global oil energy supply!

OH NOES!!

[copious.abundance]

This abundance thing is getting out of CONTROL!

+1

Well I think it's time to put all this energy shortage silliness to rest. Here is our Bold, High-tech, Abundant future (sans the flying cars - but hey, you never know!). Powered by natural gas and nuclear (and even some oil, too, just for the heck of it). The sky is the limit!

[Tyler_JC]

It is important to remember that the nuclear power industry stalled because of political reasons, not economic ones.

Countries that created policy environments favoring nuclear power (France), have thriving nuclear power industries.

Countries that panicked after Three Mile Island (US), have stunted nuclear power industries.

If the US were serious about allowing nuclear power to flourish, dozens of plants would be built and economies of scale would drag down the costs of construction.

That's not to say that there aren't legitimate concerns over nuclear power (waste, safety, nuclear proliferation, etc.) but I think we need to realize that the problems with nuclear power are not about economics or EROEI.

[NoWorries]

Well it certainly looks like this shale oil discovery really is the "Find of the Century". This is bigger than cold fusion.

[oxj]

Hunh. And to think that ORNL is in the middle of this. Who'd'ha' thunk?

[PrestonSturges]

And one of the biggest US uranium deposits sits under Loudon County VA ($$$$ horse country)

[PrestonSturges]

This abundance thing is getting out of CONTROL!

WARNING
Future May not be available as shown
Future not available in parts of India, Africa, Central, and South America
Individual fates may vary
-MST3K